Tourism adds to climate change
If there was a bubble over the Okanagan to protect our environmental destiny, what would people do differently?
Concrete and lumber have an environmental impact. Why not limit building permits to houses less than 1,200 square feet? Codes should specify better attic insulation and ventilation.
Single-level homes are best for cooling. High ceilings let heat rise, and small windows, roll down shutters and light colored roofs resist heat.
Big houses waste energy. People with larger families found 1,200 square foot bungalows commodious in the 1960s, even without air conditioning. Smaller houses mean lower housing costs and make better use of limited space. Why is there residential development in wildfire zones?
Most vehicles have one occupant. Vehicle registrations could be limited to one per household. Recreational carbon emitters, including boats, RVs, motorbikes and off road vehicles could be classified non-essential.
People want tourism, but not the carbon emissions and congestion that tourism brings. Why not an environmental charge on non-commercial vehicles from outside the Okanagan? A disincentive fee could also be applied to air travel with revenue going to environmental restoration. It’s baffling when we hear politicians crusading for better climate and better airline service at the same time.
This would stifle tourism, but maybe it’s a choice between economy and climate. Less tourism would also deflate housing prices, which would be welcome. Maybe municipal governments should place less priority on land development and encourage other revenue generators.
Scarce land and water could be used to produce food, instead of wine and cannabis. Why fly in 5,000 foreign workers to pick fruit when idle hands draw CERB? Live where you work, and work where you live.
Hydro-electric supply seems adequate at present, but how much more will electric vehicles require?
Why not municipal bans on nonessential single use plastics, like packaging and food and drink containers?
It’s confusing when we’re surrounded by towering hypocrisy, conflicting messages, fantasy solutions, and virtuous talk instead of virtuous action.
Worried about emissions? Then choose more austere lifestyles with less travel, fewer appliances and vehicles, and smaller homes with a garden. Switch to locally produced food and stop drinking bottled water. Avoid Chinese imports. Buy an electric vehicle and rooftop solar if you think it can help.
Doing something beats wringing your hands. Demanding and whining that “the government” or others take action isn’t doing something. Maybe it’s just easier to talk about the environment. John Thompson Kaleden